User Tag List

First 45678 Last

Results 51 to 60 of 115

  1. #51
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    We don't do that well at all in Europe and could learn a few things from the US on that score.
    Have you ever lived in the US? Felt like a system of unofficial apartheid was in operation last I was there.

    Quote Originally Posted by ergophobe View Post
    Turkey and France force women not to wear headscarves and they choose to wear them in protest. The issue is not the headscarf - it is one of choice. Women should be able to choose. It's not Islam that's keeping them from this choice.
    Are you seriously suggesting that the oppression of women in Islamic countries is entirely unrelated to the practice of that faith? That the notion of women as property and the sanctioning of violence against them in the Quran* is somehow irrelevant?

    *e.g. 4:34
    Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
    All fundamentalist religions seek to oppress women, it is the best means of exercising control over and subjugating them. How can one rise up against that which is not merely man's but God's will?

    Islam
    means Submission. The mandate is that all humans should be submissive (but some more submissive than others).

    Just because some women choose be complicit in their own subjugation (after a process of indoctrination which begins in childhood) doesn't make it an enlightened choice, any more than "honour suicides" are an enlightened choice.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  2. #52
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    All fundamentalist religions seek to oppress women, it is the best means of exercising control over and subjugating them.
    Sikhism doesn't!! Come join us.

    Women in Sikhism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  3. #53
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default


    "Fundamentalist" was lazy. I will qualify with monotheistic, i.e. patriarchal.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  4. #54
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    Have you ever lived in the US? Felt like a system of unofficial apartheid was in operation last I was there.
    Where were you?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  5. #55
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Where were you?
    I was in enough large cities to pick up on a theme of racial segregation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  6. #56
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    I was in enough large cities to pick up on a theme of racial segregation.
    I've lived in the suburbs and urban centers on both coasts in the United States, and I really haven't felt a "theme of racial segregation." Could you elaborate? Were you in the South?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  7. #57
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I've lived in the suburbs and urban centers on both coasts in the United States, and I really haven't felt a "theme of racial segregation." Could you elaborate? Were you in the South?
    Nope. Based in the midwest, but traveled widely.
    You don't have a ghetto culture in Greater LA?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  8. #58
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    And again at the Jaipur Literature Festival in India we are not only graced by Ayaan Hirsi Ali but also by Wole Soyinka.

    Wole Soyinka is a Nobel Laureate for Literature and the most famous living Nigerian, noted for his defence of human rights and democracy.

    And yesterday, as guest of honour, he had no hesitation in giving his opinion as -

    "England is a cesspit. England is the breeding ground of fundamentalist Muslims".
    Soyinka added:

    "This is part of the character of Great Britain. Colonialism bred an innate arrogance, but when you undertake that sort of imperial adventure, that arrogance gives way to a feeling of accommodativeness. You take pride in your openness."
    Source: England is 'cesspit' breeding Islamists, says Soyinka | Books | The Guardian

    Soyinka confuses colonialism, which the liberal thinkers of the British Enlightenment eschewed, with Imperialism - which they excused. The Enlightenment swapped colonialism for Imperialism. The two are not interchangable one is reprehensible by any standard, the other intellectually justifiable. Why not go to Africa and improve the mindset of the barbarian locals. In that respect, Soyinka is correct, the Imperial European powers were arrogant, and were no better than their colonialist forefather apart from making a better job at intellectual justification.

    The period you mention - 1688-1788 - is rather interesting. It's nice that you've come to your own conclusions about the period. I assume you have a number of reasons for starting at 1688 - but drawing a finishing line at the year Bonnie Prince Charlie died seems bold, even by your standards.

    I'll get to the point - what distinguishes British from continental European Enlightenments is levels of tolerance. Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks puts it better than I could:

    I was very struck by the fact that at the end of the day Im Jewish and at the end of the day there are sentences in the work of most of the great European philosophers that in retrospect one cannot but see as anti-Semitic. That begins with Voltaire, and it continues through Kant and Fichte and Hegel and Schopenhauer and Nietzsche and Frege and certainly Heidegger, and its a constant strand. My predecessor as chief rabbi, Immanuel Jakobovits, was named after Immanuel Kant. And yet Immanuel Kant spoke of Jews as the vampires of society and called for the euthanasia of Judaism. We know some of Kants best friends were Jewish, specifically Moses Mendelssohn, and I would never dream of calling Kant an anti-Semite, but there are sentences there which in retrospect you can see. Therefore I had this very specific feeling that somehow Britain and America had gone through the modern experience without this huge, basic structural anti-Semitism whereas continental Europe had had it.

    Sacks calls this universalist thrust of continental philosophy the flight from particularity and sees its consequences for European Jewry as disastrous. Since Judaism is a particularist monotheism, it had to fail to fit into the Enlightenment paradigm, and since you are born Jewish rather than going through confirmation, it had to fail the Kantian test not only of universalisability but also of autonomy.

    The Scottish and English enlightenments, in contrast, were more accepting of particularity, partly because they were less antithetical to religion.
    Source: TPM Online Article

    You could apply Sacks' reasoning to the subject and hand, Victor, and swap Jews for Muslims and it amounts to the same thing. I suspect if you were around in Voltaire's day you'd have been his biggest fan.

    So. Victor - Is it John Locke on religious tolerance:

    Three arguments are central: (1) Earthly judges, the state in particular, and human beings generally, cannot dependably evaluate the truth-claims of competing religious standpoints; (2) Even if they could, enforcing a single "true religion" would not have the desired effect, because belief cannot be compelled by violence; (3) Coercing religious uniformity would lead to more social disorder than allowing diversity
    Letters Concerning Toleration (1689-92)

    Or Voltaire and Diderot? (I won't bother with quotes.)

    You have made a classic mistake in reasoning: defining the Enlightenment in the singular when it is in fact many. This is called a false singular - and it's sloppy thinking. For a man who makes so many distinctions, I'd have thought this would be obvious.

    All the best.

    Quote Originally Posted by Morgan Le Fay View Post
    Have you ever lived in the US?
    Sure I have. Alaska.

    All fundamentalist religions seek to oppress women, it is the best means of exercising control over and subjugating them. How can one rise up against that which is not merely man's but God's will?

    "Fundamentalist" was lazy. I will qualify with monotheistic, i.e. patriarchal.
    All monotheistic religions seek to oppress women?

    Domestic abuse and violence towards women is so universal that laying at the feet of monotheistic religions seems hopelessly simplistic. I'm sure the Japanese don't beat up their wives or the Chinese indulge in domestic violence? I'm afraid violence towards women is fairly common the world over.

    I saw an ad on TV up in Scotland at Christmas saying domestic abuse was very widespread up there and urging viewers to report it. I suppose by your logic of "high prevalence", it shows the Scots to be a barbaric people? If prevalence is anything to go on, the Scots are the worst in the world - good, white European sons of the Enlightenment? So do we say - All Scottish men seek to oppress women?

    Yer a lightweight.

  9. #59
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,531

    Thumbs down Gratitude

    Quote Originally Posted by bananatrombones View Post
    Soyinka added:
    Source: England is 'cesspit' breeding Islamists, says Soyinka | Books | The Guardian

    Soyinka confuses colonialism, which the liberal thinkers of the British Enlightenment eschewed, with Imperialism - which they excused. The Enlightenment swapped colonialism for Imperialism. The two are not interchangable one is reprehensible by any standard, the other intellectually justifiable. Why not go to Africa and improve the mindset of the barbarian locals. In that respect, Soyinka is correct, the Imperial European powers were arrogant, and were no better than their colonialist forefather apart from making a better job at intellectual justification.

    The period you mention - 1688-1788 - is rather interesting. It's nice that you've come to your own conclusions about the period. I assume you have a number of reasons for starting at 1688 - but drawing a finishing line at the year Bonnie Prince Charlie died seems bold, even by your standards.

    I'll get to the point - what distinguishes British from continental European Enlightenments is levels of tolerance. Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks puts it better than I could:


    Source: TPM Online Article

    You could apply Sacks' reasoning to the subject and hand, Victor, and swap Jews for Muslims and it amounts to the same thing. I suspect if you were around in Voltaire's day you'd have been his biggest fan.

    So. Victor - Is it John Locke on religious tolerance:

    Letters Concerning Toleration (1689-92)

    Or Voltaire and Diderot? (I won't bother with quotes.)

    You have made a classic mistake in reasoning: defining the Enlightenment in the singular when it is in fact many. This is called a false singular - and it's sloppy thinking. For a man who makes so many distinctions, I'd have thought this would be obvious.

    All the best.
    I chose 1788 for that was the year Oz was founded by the Scottish and English Enlightenment.

    And as well 1788 was preceded by one hundred years of peace under the aristocratic ascendency.

    So we were lucky enough to avoid Continental anti-semitism, just as we were lucky enough to avoid a War of Independence and a Civil War - for there is no blood on the wattle.

    So we owe it all to the Scots and the English.

    And we expressed our gratitude in 1999, as the whole country, except for one small territory, voted to remain Subjects of Her Majesty, Elizabeth II.

  10. #60
    Senior Member matmos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    NICE
    Posts
    1,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Victor View Post
    I chose 1788 for that was the year Oz was founded by the Scottish and English Enlightenment.

    And as well 1788 was preceded by one hundred years of peace under the aristocratic ascendency.

    So we were lucky enough to avoid Continental anti-semitism, just as we were lucky enough to avoid a War of Independence and a Civil War - for there is no blood on the wattle.

    So we owe it all to the Scots and the English.

    And we expressed our gratitude in 1999, as the whole country, except for one small territory, voted to remain Subjects of Her Majesty, Elizabeth II.
    The Enlightenment ended when when modern Australia was born?

    Perhaps you could address the following?

    I'll get to the point - what distinguishes British from continental European Enlightenments is levels of tolerance. Chief Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks puts it better than I could:

    I was very struck by the fact that at the end of the day Im Jewish and at the end of the day there are sentences in the work of most of the great European philosophers that in retrospect one cannot but see as anti-Semitic. That begins with Voltaire, and it continues through Kant and Fichte and Hegel and Schopenhauer and Nietzsche and Frege and certainly Heidegger, and its a constant strand. My predecessor as chief rabbi, Immanuel Jakobovits, was named after Immanuel Kant. And yet Immanuel Kant spoke of Jews as the vampires of society and called for the euthanasia of Judaism. We know some of Kants best friends were Jewish, specifically Moses Mendelssohn, and I would never dream of calling Kant an anti-Semite, but there are sentences there which in retrospect you can see. Therefore I had this very specific feeling that somehow Britain and America had gone through the modern experience without this huge, basic structural anti-Semitism whereas continental Europe had had it.

    Sacks calls this universalist thrust of continental philosophy the flight from particularity and sees its consequences for European Jewry as disastrous. Since Judaism is a particularist monotheism, it had to fail to fit into the Enlightenment paradigm, and since you are born Jewish rather than going through confirmation, it had to fail the Kantian test not only of universalisability but also of autonomy.

    The Scottish and English enlightenments, in contrast, were more accepting of particularity, partly because they were less antithetical to religion.
    Source: TPM Online Article

    You could apply Sacks' reasoning to the subject and hand, Victor, and swap Jews for Muslims and it amounts to the same thing.
    Does Sacks have a point when he makes his distinctions.

    Answer carefully.

Similar Threads

  1. The Banned and The Damned
    By Haight in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 331
    Last Post: 11-30-2017, 07:12 PM
  2. My blog and the ideological course of culture... to be elaborated on in the new year
    By Zangetshumody in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2017, 08:41 AM
  3. MBTI and the Anti-Enlightenment
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-25-2012, 04:31 AM
  4. [Te] The Message and the Messenger
    By proteanmix in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-17-2007, 09:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO